[Csantucci]

Having different car spawner lists for e.g. highways or small country roads is of some interest for me.

Providing the ability to manage multiple car spawner lists should be reasonably simple. That could be done with two files added in the Openrails subfolder of the concerned route folder: in one file (let's call it carspawnerlists.dat) there are car spawner lists that are additional to the carspawn.dat file present in the route folder; in the other one (let's call it carspawners.dat) there are the correspondences between the car spawners (identified as world file and UiD) and the selected car spawner list (identified by a number).
No modification to existing files is therefore needed. An OR-specific RE could automatically generate the second file.

Are there comments about this?

[dforrest]

I agree with you completely that this would be a very good addition but why limit to two ...........!

[Csantucci]

It's not limited to two! In the carspawnerlists.dat file there can be more than one list of vehicles. In fact the file is called carspawnerlists.dat and not carspawnerlist.dat :)

[dforrest]

Csantucci, on 31 May 2016 - 06:04 AM, said:

It's not limited to two! In the carspawnerlists.dat file there can be more than one list of vehicles. In fact the file is called carspawnerlists.dat and not carspawnerlist.dat :)

Very good.

[eric from trainsim]

I like it. There's always been a need to have different types of spawner lists for a autobahn/expressway vs. a rural road.

Presumably the default would still be used where an alternative is not expressly specified in the OR subfolder?...

[Csantucci]

Blueprint has been filed https://blueprints.l...r-spawner-lists .
A beta release is available. To test it, update x.3551 with the files included in this .zip
 MultipleCarSpawnerLists.zip (1.11MB)
Number of downloads: 726
To use it, two files have to be created in an Openrails subfolder of the related route.
I have created a stupid test example for USA1 route, for two of the four carspawners that pass over the tracks with a viaduct just after the station on Philadelphia.
The first file is a file named extcarspawn.dat that contains all additional car spawner lists (additional because the one included in carspawner.dat is still valid and used). Here the file I used:
 extcarspawn.zip (312bytes)
Number of downloads: 619
In this case I used only a new shape (postbus.s) with respect to the ones of the standard carspawn.dat. Of course to see it you need to have that shape, or to replace it with another shape you insert in the shapes folder (together with .sd file, and with needed texture files in the textures folder).
The second file is a file named carspawnerstolists.dat. I used following sample file:
 carspawnerstolists.zip (264bytes)
Number of downloads: 631
An entry in this file must be created for every car spawner where it is desired to use a car spawner list different from the one of carspawn.dat.
The structure is self-explanatory: the car spawner is identified with world file and UiD (they may derived using track viewer and uncompressing the related .w file), and the CarSpawnerList parameter identifies the index of the car spawner list (zero is the car spawner list of the standard carspawner.dat, so that the indexes of the lists included in extcarspawn.dat start from one).

By the way these .exe files include also this http://www.elvastowe...rations-window/ .

[conductorchris]

This is great! Thank you.
Christopher

[Jovet]

Would it be possible to link Car Spawner list with a list of eligible road shape files for the entire route? That is, set the spawner list that is used based on the actual road shape the spawner spawns on.

[jonas]

Yes!, I would be thrilled if this feature of multiple individual cars pawners will exists in Open Rails in the future!
Why? As I mentioned in post #9 of topic "ORTS WishList 2014-05":

Quote

...this would be a real advantage for OR when you could have certain vehicles on certain roads. For example, one could have an automatically running tram without any tracks on an 4 lane road in the middle lanes. On fields could drive tractors or horse and carriage individual. Not to mention what would be possible thereby with ships or even aircraft or migrating bird swarms etc.

In combination with hidden railroad crossings it will be a great chance to let the trian interact with certain vehicles.

During building my last route I refrained to involve a Zeppelin aircraft as an animation, because the creation of the animation was too elaborate for me. If I had the option of an individual car spawner this time I would have let "fly" the Zeppelin simply as a car on a hidden road vector.
(Sure, it can also being realized by make the Zeppelin aircraft a driveable locomotive on hidden tracks. But then it only(!) would have been seen in activities, not in explore mode.)

Various individual car spawners would give a huge opportunity to make the environment look lively and more diversified by moving "things" of different kind. Relatively little effort, great effect!

Since the first days of MSTS I missed very hard the possibility to define lists of cars per car spawner while set in a route. What a wasted chance by Kuju!


Property window of a car spawner as is in MSTS

Truely Expected property window
With a selective list of vehicles that should used at this certain car spawner

[jonas]

@Csantucci

A small idea, instead of having two files ("extcarspawn.dat" and "carspawnerstolists.dat"), what about to sum it up in one "carspawnerstolists.dat" containing the lists direkt (and individual) like this:

2
CarSpawner(
WFile ( "w-011008+014318.w" )
UiD ( 534 )
CarSpawnerList (
CarSpawnerItem( "car1.s" 4 )
CarSpawnerItem( "postbus.s" 4 )
)
)
CarSpawner(
WFile ( "w-011008+014318.w" )
UiD ( 532 )
CarSpawnerList (
CarSpawnerItem( "policePHIL.S" 6 )
CarSpawnerItem( "truck1.s" 13 )
CarSpawnerItem( "postbus.s" 6 )
)
)

This way you only have to edit one file to set the individual car spawners completly and it will not needed to keep in mind the list index of the "extcarspawn.dat?

[mareknowosad]

Work OK
http://msts.steam4me...carspawner.html

Attached thumbnail(s)

• 
• 

[Genma Saotome]

Gosh... multiple car spawner lists to choose from when setting down a spawner. Great idea.

Any chance of enabling some variation of car and car volume by time of day? Something like this:

CarSpawnerList(
	ListsPresent (2)
	List ( 
		Name ( " String A" )
		3
		Timing (
			StartTime ( HH )
			EndTime ( HH )
			Items (
				2
				CarSpawnerItem( "car1.s" 4 )
				CarSpawnerItem( "postbus.s" 4 )
			)
		)
		Timing (
			StartTime ( HH )
			EndTime ( HH )
			Items (
				3
				CarSpawnerItem( "car1.s" 6 )
				CarSpawnerItem( "truck1.s" 13 )
				CarSpawnerItem( "postbus.s" 5 )
			)
		)
		Timing (
			StartTime ( HH )
			EndTime ( HH )
			Items (
				1
				CarSpawnerItem( "car1.s" 3 )
			)
		)
	)
	List ( 
		Name ( " String B" )
		3
		Timing (
			StartTime ( HH )
			EndTime ( HH )
			Items (
				3
				CarSpawnerItem( "policePHIL.s" 2 )
				CarSpawnerItem( "truck1.s" 13 )
				CarSpawnerItem( "postbus.s" 4 )
			)
		)
		Timing (
			StartTime ( HH )
			EndTime ( HH )
			Items (
				3
				CarSpawnerItem( "policePHIL.s" 2 )
				CarSpawnerItem( "car1.s" 9 )
				CarSpawnerItem( "postbus.s" 6 )
			)
		)
		Timing (
			StartTime ( HH )
			EndTime ( HH )
			Items (
				2
				CarSpawnerItem( "car1.s" 4 )
				CarSpawnerItem( "postbus.s" 4 )
			)
		)
	)
)

[Genma Saotome]

Csantucci, on 31 May 2016 - 04:35 AM, said:

That could be done with two files added in the Openrails subfolder of the concerned route folder....

Why make it more complex than it needs to be? Train.exe is never going to see them if they are assigned new names so why hide them? Come up with useful file names and stick 'em the route's root folder where they belong.

Five years from now when train.exe doesn't run on Win13 nobody is going to understand why there are all these Openrails subfolders all over the place.

[jonas]

In my eyes not to change any MSTS file is a good principle of OR so far. And it should be continued.

But maybe the existing directory structure of a route can be co-used actually by OR. Therefore, I would put the OR car spawner files directly into the w-folder of the route, but named them with a prefix like "OR" or similar. For example, as "OR-w-011008+014318.w". In such files the additional OR informations can be written, just an individualized car spawner list for example.

Or you use an OR-owned folder (Csantucci named it "Openrails"), where the MSTS folder structure is shadowed and even double existing for OR using only. So there should be a w-folder too.


The containing of such "OR-w-011008+014318.w" file could be this:

OR-SIMISA@@@@@@@@@@JINX0w0t______

Tr_Worldfile (

	CarSpawner (
		UiD ( 534 )
		CarFrequency ( 60 )
		CarAvSpeed ( 15 )
		TrItemId ( 1 243 )
		TrItemId ( 1 244 )
		StaticFlags ( 00000100 )
		Position ( -306.878 3.0166 40.4491 )
		QDirection ( 0 0 0 1 )
		VDbId ( 4294967295 )
		CarSpawnerList (
			CarSpawnerItem( "policePHIL.S" 6 )
			CarSpawnerItem( "truck1.s" 13 )
			CarSpawnerItem( "postbus.s" 6 )
		)
		CarSpawnerSaison ( Spring )
 		CarSpawnerSaison ( Sommer 9:00-23:00)
 		CarSpawnerSaison ( Autumn )
		CarSpawnerDayTime ( 9:00-11:30 )
		CarSpawnerDayTime ( 19:00-23:00 )
 		CarSpawnerMSTSDefault ( no )
	)
)

Maybe some data of the original MSTS car spawner are given again and then an individualized list of vehicles for that specific car spawner follows. Possible further data could be given like different daytimes or saisons and so on.

It is also conceivable to put more information in one line per car:
"CarSpawnerItem( "policePHIL.S" 6 Spring 10:00-22:00 Sommer 6:00-23:30 Autumn 10:00-21:00 ).

However, at first the normal MSTS w-file is read by OR (this way the normal car spawner is loaded at least) and then OR will check if there is any OR-prefixed file with additional informations about the world tile.

Only suggestions of course. You see my enthusiasm about the whole topic.

[James Ross]

Genma Saotome, on 03 June 2016 - 04:39 PM, said:

Why make it more complex than it needs to be? Train.exe is never going to see them if they are assigned new names so why hide them? Come up with useful file names and stick 'em the route's root folder where they belong.

Five years from now when train.exe doesn't run on Win13 nobody is going to understand why there are all these Openrails subfolders all over the place.

I'd prefer to keep all of our files in identifying directories for clarity of purpose, even if putting them elsewhere would not adversely affect MSTS.